@bathina wrote:
@lmt wrote:
@ValuSkr wrote:
Apparently the families will pay for the wedding itself and the reception; the taxpayer will be stuck with the bill for security. And the security estimate got high when Eugenie and Jack insisted on a post-wedding carriage ride down Windsor's High Street, as Harry and Meghan did.
Some in Britain are outraged that the public should foot the bill for a "minor member" of the Royal Family. Apparently Eugenie performs no public duties. I think I'd be outraged too.
Interesting to note that Eugenie and Jack are related -- third cousins once removed. It's not unusual for royalty to marry close relatives but Eugenie's connection to Jack is on her mother's, Sarah Ferguson's, side, not her father's.
Also, George Clooney and wife Amal are invited to this wedding too; they attended Harry and Meghan's affair this summer.
@ValuSkr The security costs are thought to be over $2M. If I were a British citizen I would be outraged too!!
It looks like Eugenie's wedding will be even bigger than Harry's. Harry had 600 people at this wedding, Eugenie has invited 850. David and Victoria Beckham, and Robbie Williams are also invited.
It will also be a two day event ......
The couple and their guests will enjoy a post-ceremony bunch, hosted by Queen Elizabeth, and an evening reception at the bride's family home, Royal Lodge in Windsor. However, one-upping Harry and Meghan, Brooksbank and Princess Eugenie reportedly plan to continue their wedding celebrations into the following day.
"After the more formal celebration at Windsor Castle on Friday, the Saturday bash will be a relaxed party," a source told The Times. "There will be dodgems and funfair rides, coconut shies, lots of food stalls, loads of cocktails, Bloody Marys for the hangovers and a festival vibe." Apparently a morning-after brunch just wouldn't cut it.
Are you outraged that the children of American "statesmen" have security paid for by the taxpayers when they travel the world on personal business?
@bathina Not the same thing.
Eugenie could have chosen to have a small, family wedding where security costs would've been much lower. Instead, she chose to have a very big, and very public wedding. She can have any type of wedding she wants, but her family should be the ones footing the bill for the security as well.
Fury has erupted after it emerged taxpayers are facing a huge £2million security bill for Princess Eugenie’s wedding. The minor royal, 28, who is ninth in line to the throne, will marry tequila brand ambassador Jack Brooksbank, 32, at St George’s Chapel in October.
Extra firearms officers may have to be drafted in as security is beefed up amid increased terror fears since they announced their engagement in January. But campaigners have blasted the move, with one Labour MP calling the huge expense ‘an outrage.’ It was first estimated to cost £750,000, but the bill has spiralled as sources said her father Prince Andrew has demanded a similarly glitzy event for his younger daughter with Sarah Ferguson, the Daily Mirror reports.
Emma Dent Coad, Labour MP for Kensington – where Eugenie and Jack live in Kensington Palace, told the paper: ‘In these times of heightened security risks it is irresponsible for a minor member of the royal family to have a high profile, very public wedding: ‘This may be the time to review the role and cost of minor royals.’
And Chris Williamson, Labour MP for Derby North, told the publication: ‘It really is an outrage when you’ve got people sleeping rough and gripped by poverty that people are indulging in this conspicuous consumption. No one else gets their wedding paid for by the public purse and they’ve got the resources to do it themselves.’
Blogs & Forums
